Most Big Internet Companies Speak Out For Major Surveillance Reform

from the about-time dept

Since the Snowden leaks began we've highlighted that the US internet companies should be furious about the NSA's actions, because it was almost certainly going to harm their ability to get any business outside of the US. Some of the companies seemed to be lying low, and we argued they should be speaking out and fighting back. While many of them did decide to sue for greater transparency, we argued that transparency was just one issue, and not even the most important one. About a month ago, with the revelations of the NSA infiltrating data centers, it appeared to finally dawn on the major internet companies that this was a serious issue.

Increase Oversight and Accountability (such as by making FISA an adversarial process)

Transparency About Government Demands

Respecting the Free Flow of Information

Avoiding Conflicts Among Governments

With the website, they've also sent a specific open letter to the government highlighting why this is important, focusing on the rights of individuals and the ability to keep their information private.

We understand that governments have a duty to protect their citizens. But this summer’s revelations highlighted the urgent need to reform government surveillance practices worldwide. The balance in many countries has tipped too far in favor of the state and away from the rights of the individual — rights that are enshrined in our Constitution. This undermines the freedoms we all cherish. It’s time for a change.

For our part, we are focused on keeping users’ data secure — deploying the latest encryption technology to prevent unauthorized surveillance on our networks and by pushing back on government requests to ensure that they are legal and reasonable in scope.

We urge the US to take the lead and make reforms that ensure that government surveillance efforts are clearly restricted by law, proportionate to the risks, transparent and subject to independent oversight.

Some will, undoubtedly, argue that this is all just noise for the sake of public perception, but compare what these companies are doing to the major telco companies, which not only have refused to comment on all of this, but have actively fought efforts by their own shareholders to make them just slightly more transparent (up to the level many internet companies were even before the Snowden leaks).

The question, now, is how much effort these companies will really put into getting Congress to change the laws. There are a number of different bills in Congress. Having the tech companies assist the efforts for real reform would certainly be helpful.

PR PR PR.

That's really the only comment needed. Those mega-corporations get BILLIONS by spying: they're NOT going to stop their own "commercial" surveillance. But I did clip this prior, knowing you'd run with it:Just notice how these corporations are DOING what they claim NSA / gov't should not be:

In a set of principles expanding on the letter's themes and published online leaders of the world's eight largest Internet companies Monday urged President Obama to end online mass surveillance and bulk data-gathering, like that revealed by former National Security Agency contractor Edward J. Snowden.", the companies demand for the first time an end to the huge-scale vacuuming-up of the communications of millions of people not even suspected of any wrongdoing.

"Governments should limit surveillance to specific, known users for lawful purposes, and should not undertake bulk data collection of Internet communications," the principles state.

Although the companies have previously asked for the right to be more transparent with their customers about how they cooperate with law enforcement and intelligence agencies, Monday's letter is the first time they have called so clearly for an end to bulk collection.

Re:

Sure, they say they're bothered

But at the end of the day, guess what? These companies get paid for the information/access to the information that the NSA receives from them. Really. Surely you don't think they give this stuff away, do you?

That's the truth, and that's why nothing will ever change.

They can bitch, whine, moan, piss and groan all they want in public, but in private they'll be waiting for the next check from the government for all that access.

Plus, an odd note: why aren't the telcos in on this? Verizon and others would be amongst the prime players in this entire insanity, but nothing from them.

ISP's Notably Absent

Re: ISP's Notably Absent

This was exactly my observation. You would think after AT&T got denied their chance to join in the European bid on telecommunications that they would be riding hard on this part about spying having damaged their business model. Instead they are telling their stockholders it's none of their business. AT&T doesn't want to give up all that sweet lagniappe it's pulling in by co-operating with the government over these data collecting and relinquishing programs.

The stockholders are right though. Had I another choice AT&T would not be my ISP. As it is I limit their ability to collect data as much as possible. These stockholders are looking to the future. In that future, the damage by all this spying will be reflected on who gets what contracts where. What they are pulling in won't equal what they could be pulling in with a larger global presence. A presence I suspect will be dampened by their present actions in cahoots with the government.

One thing is sure, the NSAs days of rabid spying and unlimited expansion is going to be pinched back. Obama claims he's going to do it but I believe him about like I believe that lake out there is magically going to turn to steam today and be an ice skating rink tonight. Since he's been a wholesale supporter of this spying I have to assume he's said that to limit the reigning in as much as possible, not because he actually wants change. He's looking for the minimal necessary to satisfy the public resentment while continuing business as usual.

It's high time to fire Clapper and haul his butt to court over lying to the Senate Intelligence Committee with his least untruthful answer. It's time to have a general booting of butts in that agency, removing all the tainted people that have now been exposed to this travesty of respecting the public's privacy.

Re: FYI: Apple IS a part of this, too

Re: Re: ISP's Notably Absent

AT&T comes from phone company roots, and as a phone company, it's pretty much mandatory to be effectively a department of the government or it gets punished in terms of regulations and contracts. They have a very, very long history -- going all the way back to the telegraph -- of facilitating government surveillance on their communications channels.

Re: Re: What is the Point?

More likely these companies object to being cut out of the opportunity to get contracts to do the exact same thing. Shame not to be able to get paid twice for the same data.

I was a little disappointed that there's no article about the revelation that Google are funding scumbags like Grover Norquist and other Nazis masquerading as Republicans. I love seeing Google aligned with sleaze weasels like the Koch brothers. Nothing better to mark the "Don't be evil" guys as world class hypocrites.

Re: Re: What is the Point?

One man can't make much of a difference. You've got to get as many people on board as possible so you've got a block vote for the third party/independent. That means agreeing on who the third party/independent candidate should be.

Now would be a good time to start researching and promoting possible candidates on your social media accounts so when the election season begins, you're ready. Back the most popular of the third party candidate, and you've got a reasonable chance of getting that person in.